• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I'm generally against moving provinces from the province they are named after on the map to a province of another name. Makes it all rather confusing. Having said that (and being absolutely not knowledgable about the areas east of the Oder), I'd say don't move Moskva.

About Tver, I see no real reason to keep it in other than the 'it can't be anything else' reason... wouldn't this be a Ragusa-case?
 
I wouldn't say it's a Ragusa case at all, Tver, even though dwarfed by its neighbors, was still quite powerful and large, and had no limitations on action. Granted the right conditions for instance, it isn't unreasonable that Tver could have become a power to be reckoned with.

Also, take another look at where the cities are located. Now assuming we stick with the very weird EU2 Russian placement, Lithuania isn't in Tver, half of Tver is inside the Lithuanian province of Tula, and Novgorod owns the other half of Tver.

Stick with city ownership. Keeps you sane.
 
Originally posted by Mad King James
I wouldn't say it's a Ragusa case at all, Tver, even though dwarfed by its neighbors, was still quite powerful and large, and had no limitations on action. Granted the right conditions for instance, it isn't unreasonable that Tver could have become a power to be reckoned with.

Also, take another look at where the cities are located. Now assuming we stick with the very weird EU2 Russian placement, Lithuania isn't in Tver, half of Tver is inside the Lithuanian province of Tula, and Novgorod owns the other half of Tver.

Stick with city ownership. Keeps you sane.

Yeah, I guess Russia can be quite a maddening place... :) But if we let them stay, we should give them more then just 3 events! SOMETHING must have happend in there before the Muscowite conquest!
 
Well, there is one I can think of, Afanasy Nikitin's journey from his home in Tver to Shirvan then on through Persia to Bombay, and the various and sundry tales he brought home to Russia.
 
Sanity is overrated.

*does some historical digging*

http://www.xenophongi.org/rushistory/rulers/success6.htm

A bit off topic, but cute site on the House of Tver (Yaroslav). Has some minor important dates, and the potential for a flavour event, but not really what I'm looking for. Tver is however shown here to be the chief competitor of Muscowy. Don't know how reliable this source is. I'm having a bit of problems finding other sites, as it is late and I am tired. But judging from what I've seen, Tver seems quite important in the early 15th century.

Still, whatever the outcome, I don't think I'd be bothered all that much by Tver disappearing.
 
Originally posted by Eldin
Sanity is overrated.

*does some historical digging*

http://www.xenophongi.org/rushistory/rulers/success6.htm

A bit off topic, but cute site on the House of Tver (Yaroslav). Has some minor important dates, and the potential for a flavour event, but not really what I'm looking for. Tver is however shown here to be the chief competitor of Muscowy. Don't know how reliable this source is. I'm having a bit of problems finding other sites, as it is late and I am tired. But judging from what I've seen, Tver seems quite important in the early 15th century.


They once were a serious competitor to Moscow, but by 1419 I class them as a waning power, and would almost rather see the province gobbled up by Novgorod. BTW, what is the current Novgorod/Moscow status? Is Novgorod still having problems by getting attack and gang-banged by Scandinavia/Muscowy? If that is the case I don't think a extra province would hurt.

And besides, it would mean less BB for Muscowy, which is quite an important factor in my opinion, as they are supposed to conquer quite a lot. Much more then those colonising bastards Spain, England or even France. I think Muscowy often gets into some (BB-)problems with unifing Russia, and one less Russian state could help them...
 
Alfred the Great?
Llywelyn the Great?

Both led countries that were close to extinction, but managed to keep them going.
 
Originally posted by Isaac Brock
Alfred the Great?
Llywelyn the Great?

Both led countries that were close to extinction, but managed to keep them going.

Excuse me for bothering, but in Russian history you've got a really big butch of "Great" Princes.
Reason is - "Great" is their titular epithet - not people acknowledgement of their doings. According to history - each & every Prince who led Great Principality (Kiev - Souzdal - Kiev again - Vladimir - Tver - Moscow) when this state was considered as Great Principality was "Great" by his titel.
Weird things happened, but all of them had their reasons - for example Princes of Polotsk were Great Princes, because their branch derived from other branches before Lubech Sobor, which define "Greatness" titulature. (By the way - last Polotsk Prince wed his daughter Lietuanian Prince Mindougas - then Lietuanian' Princes became "Great" Princes via this asset.)
"Greatness" of Tver in beginning of XV century derived from fact - "Great" branch of Princes of Vladimir were extinct (in beginning of XIV century to be exact) - then Tver became "Great" Principality in eyes of other Russian small principalities
. On other hand Golden Horde (Tver suzerain) acknowledged "Greatness" of Moscow where ruled descendants of Alexander Nevsky - faithful & loyal suuporter of Golden Horde. Then it was a political issue - who can declare "Greatness" of Prince - common russian opinion or - their Mongol (& Muscovy) ruler's point of view. Horde won ;)
(Funny thing - you can't find any Muscovy archive or annual describing any Tver ruler as "Great" & you can't find any Tver/South of South-West Russian principality/Lietuania archive giving "Great" status for Muscovy ruler - while Tver was independent)
Then - from 1314 till "Great" Boris of Tver death - North Russia has got two "Great" Princes - of Tver & of Muscovy. Their titels haven't any comparisons with modern term "greatness". :)

Brgds, Alex Bash.
 
Last edited:
So, Bash, do you think removing Tver would improve the situation for Novgorod (or whoever would get the province), and do you think that is reason enough to remove Tver?

I must remind you that they only have 3 historical events (1 unhistorical for forming Russia in case Muscowy is gone), so getting rid of them wouldn't really be a great loss...
 
To MadKingJames

Dear MKJ!

I'm agree with you about incongruency of real historical map with map of EU2. I'm sure real Moscow situates more in "Tula" region of EU then in "Moscow", but... I'm afraid your idea would create more problems then resolve.

For example - are you sure there were any significant "Yaroslav" & "Vologda" independent Russian Principalities in 1419???

Your idea would be more correct if you said: 268 -Vologda, 270 - Moscow, 271 - Vladimir, 272 - Nizhgorod, 279 - Tula & 448 - Ryazan "Regions of Game" belong to Muscovy Principality in 1419. Then you can name them as you wish - placing city of Moscow in Tula Region - for example. (By the way - western neighbour of Moscow must be Smolensk - then "Welikiya" Region is actually - Smolensk region of reality. Tver is placed on north-west direction not in west - you are right of course. Moscow region can't have any mutual borders with actual Nogorod region - You are right again!)

Then... All Russian region need to be remapped for realism reason, but... Do we need it? Well, we live (& smoothly play) with a fact - "Moscow District" region of reality has more territory then modern Holland, Belgium & Luxembourg taken as whole. & what? Are you sure if it is necessary to create small (& independent!) Principalities of Kashira, Zvenigorod, Dmitrov, Serpoukhov, Kashin, Vereya, Belozero, Staritza for our game purposes? All these principalities had more territory then Geldre or Oldenburg in 1419 - they were independent (but their princes served in Muscovy Army as plain officers) - & what? (All of these Principalities were happily & willingly annexed by Moscow one by one in XV-XVI centuries.)
We need to have some level of definition in any "description of reality" then - this level is reached & I'm not sure if we need to create new Principalities in Russian Plane at all :).

Brgds, Alex bash.
 
Yeah, in my actual setup I had Vologda as part of Muscowy, and Yaroslavl as part of Novgorod (though perhaps they should be part of Muscowy as well?)
 
Originally posted by anti_strunt
So, Bash, do you think removing Tver would improve the situation for Novgorod (or whoever would get the province), and do you think that is reason enough to remove Tver?

Oh, it's subtle moment. Tver was in "gray zone" between hostile forces of Muscovy & Novgorod - quite long. In some sense - both countries tried to keep her as "security belt" of some sort, or possible battle-ground in case of hostilities. It was really poor state & poor country in XV century - Sector Ghaza in modern Izrael-Palestine situation - no one wants it,- but it is important trading pawn in any peace talks :).

I think.... Better to keep her then - to give her to any party. (Rob her slightly in tax sense in you like it & return her in normal tax situation after Russia creation - if you wish.)

Brgds, Alex bash.

P.S. I'm sure SUZ - isn't good thing for reality, but TVE - is good enough. (RYA - is necessary buffer between MOS & STE - if you like to know my opinion). TVE & RYA must survive, SUZ - definitely not
 
Originally posted by Mad King James
Yeah, in my actual setup I had Vologda as part of Muscowy, and Yaroslavl as part of Novgorod (though perhaps they should be part of Muscowy as well?)

It seems - 271 (Vladimir) region to Novgorod or Vjatka by your definition would be more correct then Yaroslav of your definition (270) (Novgorod never got these lands - due to... ah it's really long story :). About 271 region... It was a land of constant struggle, but it can be named as Novgorodian land (in 1419 - anyway< & be ready Muscovy Army would enter these land in first excuse ;) - in game & in reality as well)..

I'm afraid - Novgorod has already no chance against Muscovy in battle-field (in single=play or MP - no difference) then giving him any province don't meke him good, but who knows?

Brgds, Alex Bash
 
Originally posted by anti_strunt
So, Bash, do you think removing Tver would improve the situation for Novgorod (or whoever would get the province), and do you think that is reason enough to remove Tver?

I must remind you that they only have 3 historical events (1 unhistorical for forming Russia in case Muscowy is gone), so getting rid of them wouldn't really be a great loss...

In spite of my previous message, I've checked situation more close: I've played 1.42 scenario 1419 in hands-off mode (as a Kongo) in three variants:
A) Tver is independent;
B) Tver province is part of Muscovy;
C) Tver province is part of Novgorod;
Initial setting was 5-5 (Furious-Very Hard) for quickening process with 30 runs (10 for each variant) with stop sign in 1459. (It takes around 2 hours of authonomous comp counting - & can be repeated by any intarested party.) Well...
In variant A) - Tver never survived at all :). It went to Moscow in 7 cases & to Lithuania in 3 cases. (It's possible she was Novgorodian in between, because I found message about "Novgorod annexed Tver" 3 times in a run - all times she went to Moscow as result.)
In variant B) - this province was Muscovy province in 8 cases & Lithuanian province in 2 cases.
In variant C) - drumrolls... :) It became Muscovy province in 5 cases, Lithuanian in 3 cases, Denmark in 1 case, & in 1 case it went to... Livonia :).
I'm sure - you can get other results, but they would vary in really small margin - then...

It means - Novgorod hasn't tools for having Tver on constant basis (or for suviving as well :) in 1.42 (as well as in any other mods or variants). (It is good for mod' historical adequacy :).
Tver had't any chance for surviving as independent country at all. (It's good as well :).
Muscovy is inclined to get this province anyway, then...

If you need TVE tag you can exterminate Tver for game purposes with an ease. If you like more smooth play you can give her to Muscovy. If you like more unpredictable result give her to Novgorod. But if you like to creat more complex things in this region - you can let her to Lithuania (next most serious bidder after Muscovy in this battle-ground), but don't give Lithuania shield on her.

Brgds, Alex

P.S. I haven't finish my experiment with Ryazan in 1.42 yet, but it seems you can free RYA tag as well with giving her to STE (preferentially), but it gives MOS an excuse for crushing STE very fast; or to LIT, but strenght of Lithuania can get out of hand (in case of letting her TVE as well), or to MOS with - predictable result as well.
 
A minor Russian event. How far along is the Russian event IDs? Is 40131 right?

Code:
[color=orange]#Claims of the House Gottorp
event = {
        id = 40131
       trigger = {
                  monarch   = 05147

                     }
       random = no
       country = RUS
       name = "Claims of the House Gottorp"
       desc = "As well as being the newly crowned Tzar of Russia, Petr III was also Duke of the house Gottorp. A dysnasty which held claims to parts of Slesvig and Holstein." 
       style = 4
       date = { day = 20 month = january year = 1761 }
       
        action_a = {
                      name = "Good."

                      command = { type = addcore   which = 306 }
                 }[/color]
 
Last edited:
About Peter III event...

Ryan suggested:
code:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------#Claims of the House Gottorp
event = {
id = 40131
trigger = {
monarch = 05147

}
random = no
country = RUS
name = "Claims of the House Gottorp"
desc = "As well as being the newly crowned Tzar of Russia, Petr III was also Duke of the house Gottorp. A dysnasty which held claims to parts of Slesvig and Holstein."
style = 4
date = { day = 20 month = january year = 1761 }
action_a = {
name = "These lands will be ours once more."

command = { type = addcore which = 306 }
}--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure if this event rings right bell by historical approach:
Russia was bleeded white by Seven' Years War - according to "Worterbuch zur Deutschen Militar Geschichten" (Russian sources rather vague on this subject with a reason!) Russia to 1762 lost more soldiers then all other participitans of war taken as whole - then while Officers of German origin (Orlov's - for example - whose mother had maiden name - von Ritt, or Suvorov - whose mother was Deutsch as well) supported Ekatherine II the Great claim on throne (these guys were deprived from taking part in this war due to their blood-origin) over-threw Polish-oriented surrounding of deceased Elisabeth Petrovna (maiden name of her mother was Skawronska) - there wasn't slavonic-origin officers led military troops enough for stopping them (& support so-named "Polish" party led by Kanzler Vorontzov). It means - military human resources of Russia was on the brink & it was main reason for hasty peacetalks with a Friedrich by Peter III - not anything else.
Would Peter III or anyone else claim Gottorp supported as fighting Pruusia as non-fighting with Russia Great Britain? I'm afraid not - it would be - sure defeat against combined Prussian land & British naval force. Then...

Then this event can be done, but it need heavy editing. For example:
action_a ={ #Forget about it#
command = { type = relation which = ENG value = 200 }
command = { type = relation which = PRU value = 100 }
command = { type = DIP which = -3 value = 240 }
action_b = {
name = "These lands will be ours once more."
command = { type = addcore which = 306 }
command = { type = revoltrisk which = 36 value = 3 }
command = { type = stability value = -3 }
command = { type = relation which = ENG value = -200 }
command = { type = relation which = PRU value = -100 }


or something similar... :( - not sure about it.

In any case we need some tools for improving RUS-ENG & RUS-PRU attitude in around 1761-1762 & worsening RUS-FRA & RUS-POL diplomatic attitude. Giving 306 as shield for Russia is a step in definitely wrong direction.

Just mine 2 Kopecks about it :).

Brgds, Bash.
 
I don't buy Russia was bled white by 1762. maybe they lost more troops than everyone else (although I'd be interested in seeing what they have to say about that) but their manpower base was much bigger than Prussia's, and significantly bigger than Austrias. After all Russia was able to fight a major war a few years later when no-one else (except the British) really could.

In 1762 French finances were a mess, and Prussian manpower had been badly hit. Everyone was in bad shape.

The Russian did send troops to participate on the Prussian side in the 1762 campaign after all. If they made peace because they were bled white why on earth didn't they just keep the troops at home?

Frederick the Great was in no shape to defeat Russia in 1762. He couldn't even do it in 1758.

Anyway your modifications on the event aren't half bad. Peter III never made much of an effort to regain Holstein.
 
Originally posted by Bash
In spite of my previous message, I've checked situation more close: I've played 1.42 scenario 1419 in hands-off mode (as a Kongo) in three variants...

It means - Novgorod hasn't tools for having Tver on constant basis (or for suviving as well :) in 1.42 (as well as in any other mods or variants). (It is good for mod' historical adequacy :).
Tver had't any chance for surviving as independent country at all. (It's good as well :).
Muscovy is inclined to get this province anyway, then...

If you need TVE tag you can exterminate Tver for game purposes with an ease. If you like more smooth play you can give her to Muscovy. If you like more unpredictable result give her to Novgorod. But if you like to creat more complex things in this region - you can let her to Lithuania (next most serious bidder after Muscovy in this battle-ground), but don't give Lithuania shield on her.

HAHAH!! The Get-Rid-Of-Tver Party, (of my creation) stands triumphant!! Well, almost. I still have to convince anyone else that it's a good idea... ;)